THE  HEART  OF  EUROPE  • CH.  PERGLER 


■ •*  ..  ..  s'..' 4 h;  « - • 


CH.  PERGLER:  THE  HEART  OF  EUROPE 


The  Cathedral  of  Saint  Vitus  at  Prague,  founded 
in  the  tenth  century,  completed  in  the  year  1384 


THE  HEART  OF  EUROPE 

AN  ADDRESS  DELIVERED  BY  CHARLES 
PERGLER  IN  WASHINGTON,  DECEMBER 
ii,  1916,  AT  A CONFERENCE  OF  OPPRESSED 
OR  DEPENDENT  NATIONALITIES.  WITH 
A FOREWORD  BY  PROFESSOR  ALOIS  F. 
KOVARIK,  Ph.D.,  D.Sc.,YALE  UNIVERSITY 


PUBLISHED  BY  THE  BOHEMIAN  (CZECH) 
NATIONAL  ALLIANCE,  AT  NUMBER  3639 
WEST  26th  STREET,  CHICAGO,  ILLINOIS 


foreword  Civilization  cannot  make 

true  progress  without  liberty  and  justice,  and  it  needs 
peace  as  well.  Without  liberty  and  justice,  however, 
peace  is  ephemeral.  Without  peace,  progress  is  or  at 
least  seems  to  be  slow.  Yet  history  offers  plenty  of 
examples  of  various  social  struggles  and  wars  fought 
to  establish  the  rights  of  man  as  an  individual  and 
the  rights  of  nations  as  collective  units  with  the  re- 
sulting greater  progress  during  the  peace  periods  that 
followed  such  struggles.  History  also  gives  us  exam- 
ples of  “might  is  right”  with  the  resulting  retarding 


5 


influence  on  the  progress  of  civilization.  sILAs  Amer- 
ican citizens  we  consider  the  declaration  of  our  right 
to  life,  liberty,  and  the  pursuit  of  happiness  as  thecor- 
ner-stone  of  the  strudture  of  our  democratic  form  of 
government.  This  principle  applied  to  us  as  individ- 
uals we  firmly  believe  to  be  fundamentally  necessary 
when  applied  to  nations.  As  a nation  we  have  proved 
our  belief  in  this  principle  by  the  declaration  of 
Monroe’s  Dodtrine  nearly  a century  ago  as  well  as  by 
our  recent  behavior  toward  Cuba  and  by  our  present 
attitude  toward  Mexico.  What  we  believe  to  be  the 
truth  for  ourselves  we  believe  to  be  the  truth  when 
applied  to  others.  We  believe  in  the  right  of  every 
nation  to  life  and  to  the  freedom  of  self-development 
without  interference  by  force  from  other  nations, 
provided  that  such  a freedom  does  not  interfere  with 
or  violate  the  corresponding  rights  of  other  nations. 
s^The  present  great  European  war  is  a conflict  be- 
tween races  on  the  one  side  espousing  this  liberal  and 
democratic  principle  and  races  on  the  other  side  boast- 
fully proclaiming  that  “ might  is  right.”  It  is  a strug- 
gle of  races  for  the  possession  of  the  right  to  their 
individuality — theirnational  soul — against  racesde- 
nying  the  weak  nations  the  same  right  to  live  as  the 
strong  nations.  Prussia’s  history  is  a history  of  con- 
quest, of  Germanization,  and  of  preparations  for  more 
conquest  and  Germanization.  Even  with  a know- 
ledge but  not  a full  realization  of  these  fadts,  the  world 
generally,  previous  to  this  war,  would  have  resented 
on  behalf  of  the  German  race  any  insinuation  that 
such  crimes  as  have  been  committed  by  the  Germans 
in  this  war  could  be  claimed  to  be  possible  of  perpe- 


6 


tration  by  them.  During  this  war,  however,  the  true 
earmarks  of  the  national  character  of  the  Prussianized 
Germans  have  become  amply  known  to  the  world. 
The  world  can  well  form  its  own  judgment  about  a 
race  that  can  celebrate  and  have  its  school  children 
participate  in  the  celebration  of  the  sinking  of  the 
Lusitania!  What  rights  and  justice  can  a conquered 
nation  expedt  from  such  a race?  The  forcible  expa- 
triation of  the  Poles  by  Prussia  in  the  years  preced- 
ing the  great  war  as  well  as  the  Prussian  behavior  in 
Belgium  and  northern  France  since  the  beginning 
of  the  war  makes  Prussia  a proper  ally  of  Austria  and 
of  Turkey,  whose  Serbian  and  Armenian  crimes  are 
only  a continuation  of  their  histories  so  replete  with 
murder,  oppression,  and  injustice.  ^Austria’s  treat- 
ment of  Bohemia  after  the  Bohemian  period  of  the 
thirty  years’  war  was  one  of  constant  forcible  expa- 
triation, murder,  and  attempts  at  a complete  anni- 
hilation of  the  Bohemian  people.  Her  continued 
fearful  oppression  and  enslavement  of  the  Bohemian 
people  for  two  centuries  and  her  untiring  zeal  to 
destroy  all  the  cultural  products  of  centuries  of  the 
Bohemian  people,  especially  their  literature,  and  to 
erase  the  glorious  history  of  Bohemia  from  the  pages 
of  history  of  the  nations  of  the  world  was  the  ap- 
plication of  “might  is  right”  of  vidtorious  German 
Austria  over  Bohemia.  Were  it  not  for  the  fadt  that 
the  blessings  flowing  from  the  French  Revolution 
spread  over  Bohemia,  as  well  as  over  Europe  gener- 
ally, it  is  not  unlikely  that  Austria  would  have  con- 
tinued her  fearful  rule  in  Bohemia  during  the  past 
century  as  she  carried  it  on  during  the  two  preceding 


7 


centuries.  Austria’s  moderation  in  her  persecution 
was  not  due  to  any  change  of  her  innate  nature,  but 
was  rather  the  result  of  general  European  pressure 
in  favor  of  humanity  and  toleration  and  also  due 
partly  to  dynastic  fears.  Austria’s  practised  motto  ever 
has  been  Oppression  and  Injustice.  ^ Under  a misrule 
such  as  Austria  is  guilty  of  over  the  various  peoples 
of  her  empire,  the  peace  and  progress  loving  Bohe- 
mian race  cannot  and  will  not  forever  remain.  In  the 
last  half  century  during  which  the  Bohemian  people 
wrested  a small  portion  of  their  inherent  rights  of 
self-development,  they  have  produced  an  enviable 
literature,  they  have  advanced  science  in  all  its 
branches,  they  have  contributed  wealth  to  music 
and  art.  Through  their  own  efforts  against  odds,  they 
have  placed  themselves  as  the  leading  intellectual 
people  in  Austria-Hungary.  Among  them  illiteracy 
is  praCtically  unknown.  A race  with  such  a strong 
determination  and  character  has  a true  and  real  soul. 
The  Bohemian  race  to-day  is  worthy  of  its  illustrious 
past ; it  is  worthy  of  its  national  heroes,  Hus,  Come- 
nius,  and  Havlicek.  It  has  the  right  to  self-develop- 
ment unhindered  by  an  undesirable  patriarchal  gov- 
ernment of  its  German  neighbors.  It  has  a right  to 
absolute  independence,  political  as  well  as  cultural. 
It  is  hoped  that  this  war  may  bring,  among  other 
things,  an  end  to  the  vicious  rule  of  minority  over 
majority,  of  Austrian  Germans  over  the  Bohemians, 
and  of  the  Magyars  over  the  Slovaks  and  the  Serbs. 

Alois  F.  Kovarik 

New  Haven,  Conn.,  January  20,  IQ17 


8 


ent  or  oppressed  nationalities  — the  very  title  indi- 
cates that  it  is  unnecessary  to  dwell  upon  the  wrongs 
suffered  by  the  Bohemian  (Czech)  and  Slovak  peoples 
under  the  Austrian  and  Magyar  regimes.  ^The  world 
is  beginning  at  last  to  realize  that  the  German  mi- 
nority in  Austria,  during  the  past  four  decades  with 
the  adtive  support  of  Berlin  and  always  adtively  sup- 
ported by  the  Hapsburg  dynasty,  for  generations  has 
been  seeking  to  throttle  the  legitimate  aspirations 
of  non-German  nationalities.  s^The  myth  of  Mag- 


9 


yar  chivalry  and  Magyar  fairness  is  finally  being  dis- 
pelled. The  world  now  understands  that  Hungary  is 
governed  by  an  Asiatic  oligarchy  of  Magyar  nobil- 
ity, under  whose  regime  the  Slovaks  have  suffered, 
and  are  even  now  undergoing,  a veritable  martyrdom. 

For  the  purposes  of  my  remarks  knowledge  of  these 
fadts  may  and  must  be  taken  for  granted.  s£The  con- 
dition of  dependent  or  oppressed  nationalities  pre- 
sents a problem  which  no  country,  least  of  all  the 
United  States,  can  afford  to  ignore,  not  merely  as  a 
matter  of  abstract  justice  and  righteousness,  but  in 
its  own  interest.  ^The  causes  of  the  present  war  are 
manifold,  but  no  one  will  gainsay  that  one  of  the  con- 
tributing fadtors  to  its  outbreak  was  the  failure  prop- 
erly to  solve  and  adjust  the  mutual  relations  of  Eu- 
ropean nationalities,  large  and  small.  The  war  shall 
have  been  fought  in  vain  if  it  does  not  lead  to  a solu- 
tion of  these  problems.  Failure  to  solve  them  aright 
will  keep  alive  sparks  from  which  will  be  kindled 
in  no  distant  future  another  devastating  conflagra- 
tion. ^The  President  of  the  United  States  in  a recent 
speech  declared  this  to  be  the  last  war  during  which 
this  country  could  remain  neutral.  s^The  purpose  of 
this  conference  is  said  to  be  the  formulation  of  public 
opinion  on  these  questions.  s£If  we  are  to  be  success- 
ful in  our  aim,  we  must  first  define  at  least  the  funda- 
mental principle,  or  principles,  upon  which  we  may 
all  agree.  This  foundation  for  future  discussion  un- 
doubtedly is  what  has  become  known  as  the  principle 
of  nationality,  or,  in  other  words,  the  principle  that 
each  nation,  no  matter  how  small,  numerically  speak- 
ing, has  the  right  to  govern  itself  according  to  its 


own  lights  and  without  outside  interference.  s^The 
value  of  little  nations  is  only  now  beginning  to  be 
truly  appreciated.  “Thelittle  nations,  with  their  own 
“ languages,  their  own  literatures, their  glory  in  their 
“ own  history,  were  never  more  alive,  never  more 
“ important,  than  they  are  to-day  in  this  conflict  of 
“gigantic  Empires,”  corredtly  declared  Mr.  Lloyd 
George  in  a recent  speech.  ^The  world  undoubtedly 
has  already  lost  very  much  because  of  the  oppression 
of  small  nationalities.  Scandinavian  contributions  to 
culture — not  Kultur  ! — and  to  civilization  are  very 
substantial.  They  were  made  possible  largely  because 
the  Scandinavians  as  nations  have  enjoyed  an  untram- 
melled development.  A nation  fighting  for  its  exist- 
ence could  have  hardly  given  to  the  world  an  Ibsen 
or  a Bjornson.  s£The  value  of  Czech  literature  is  still 
little  known.  Many  a masterpiece  has  been  penned 
in  the  musical  language  of  this  nation  living  in  the 
heart  of  Europe.  But  what  would  have  been  the  fruits 
of  Czech  industry  and  Czech  genius  hadnot  the  nation 
been  compelled  for  centuries  to  struggle  for  mere  ex- 
istence ? st  No  thoughtful  man  or  woman,  no  normal 
human  being,  believes  in  the  dodtrine  of  supermen 
evolved  in  Germany  — we  may  not  care  to  go  so  far 
as  to  call  it  a German  dodtrine.  No  one  will  subscribe 
to  the  dodtrine  of  super-nations.  s^The  right  of  small 
nations  to  exist,  even  in  the  light  of  purely  utilitarian 
reasons,  as  important  fadtors  in  the  onward  march 
of  the  human  race,  needs  no  elaborate  vindication. 
s£The  expression  “principle  of  nationality”  stands, 
therefore,  for  an  important  force  in  the  scheme  of 
human  affairs.  But  to  speak  of  the  principle  of  nation- 


ality  is  to  indulge  in  generalities.  What  you  undoubt- 
edly expeCt,  and  what  should  be  done  here  clearly 
and  without  equivocation,  is  that  the  spokesmen  of 
the  various  nationalities  represented  here  apply  the 
principle  of  nationality  to  specific  faCts ; that  they 
come  with  a definite  programme,  at  least  in  outline, 
in  so  far  as  the  nation  they  represent  is  concerned. 
^This  conference  has  a constructive  mission  and 
unless  this  is  fulfilled,  it  will  have  been  held  in  vain 
and  our  hopes  of  influencing  American  public  opin- 
ion along  the  right  lines  will  dissolve  in  a fog  of  mere 
words,  futile  criticisms,  and  glittering  generalities. 


expression  in  a manifesto  of  the  Bohemian  (Czech) 
foreign  committee,  issued  in  Paris  on  the  14th  day  of 
November,  1915,  from  which  the  following  at  least 
should  be  quoted:  “All  Bohemian  political  parties 
“ have  up  to  this  time  been  fighting  for  a qualified  in- 
“ dependence  within  the  limits  of  Austria-Hungary. 
“ But  the  events  of  this  terrible  war  and  the  reckless 
“ violence  of  Vienna  constrain  us  to  claim  independ- 
“ ence  without  regard  to  Austria-Hungary. — We  ask 
“for  an  independent  Bohemian-Slovak  state. — The  Bo- 


“ hemian  people  are  now  convinced  that  they  must 
“ strike  out  for  themselves.  Austria  was  defeated  not 
“ only  by  Russia,  but  by  the  little,  despised  Serbia,  and 
“ is  now  a dependency  of  Germany.  To-day  Berlin 
“ has  galvanized  this  corpse,  but  it  is  the  last  effort. 
“ Austria-Hungary  has  abdicated.  We  have  lost  all 
“ confidence  in  its  vitality;  it  has  no  longer  any  rea- 
“ son  for  existence.  By  its  incapacity,  by  its  voluntarv 
“ subordination  to  Germany  it  has  convinced  the 
“ whole  world  that  the  former  belief  in  the  mission 
“ of  Austria  is  out  of  date,  forever  overthrown  by  the 
“ European  war.  Those  who  defended  the  usefulness, 
“ even  the  necessity  of  Austria-Hungary,  and  at  one 
“ time  the  great  Bohemian  historian  and  statesman 
“ Palacky  was  one  of  them,  thought  of  Austria  as  a 
“ federal  system  of  nations  and  lands  with  equal  rights. 
“ But  Austria-Hungary  as  a dualistic  monster  became 
“ the  oppressor  of  all  who  were  not  Germans  or  Mag- 
“ yars.  It  is  a standing  threat  to  the  peace  of  Europe, 
“ a mere  tool  of  Germany  seeking  conquest  in  the 
“ East,  a state  having  no  destiny  of  its  own,  unable 
“ to  construct  an  organic  state  composed  of  a number 
“ of  equal,  free,  progressive  races.  The  dynasty  living 
“ in  its  traditions  of  absolutism  manages  to  maintain 
“ the  semblance  of  the  former  world  power  through 
“ the  undemocratic  cooperation  of  a sterile  nobility, 
“ a bureaucracy  that  belongs  to  no  race,  and  a body 
“ of  army  officers  that  is  against  every  race.”s£This 
is  the  authoritative  expression  of  the  Bohemian  po- 
sition. I have  neither  the  right,  nor  the  desire,  to  de- 
viate in  the  smallest  degree  from  the  programme  so 
defined.  ^Independence — that  one  word  embodies 


The  Horologe-Tower  (built  in  the  year  1474)  of 
the  City  Hall  of  Prague,  the  Capital  of  Bohemia 


the  whole  Bohemian  programme.  ^ I do  notlose  sight 
of  the  fad:  that  under  favorable  conditions  the  prin- 
ciple of  nationality  may  find  realization  in  a federal 
state,  and,  as  you  have  noticed  in  the  excerpt  from 
our  manifesto,  Czechs  and  Slovaks  at  one  time  sought 
to  make  of  Austria  such  a federal  state,  where  the 
various  nationalities  embraced  within  its  boundaries 
would  be  treated  with  fairness  and  even-handed  jus- 
tice. s^Thehope  in  the  possibility  of  a federal  Austria 
is  so  persistent  that  it  is  worth  while  to  endeavor  to  lay 
this  ghost  once  and  forever,  and  especially  to  demon- 
strate that  there  is  no  legitimate  comparison  between 
Austria  and  our  own  federal  government.  This  is  es- 
pecially desirable  because  even  the  printed  statement 
of  the  aims  of  this  conference,  formulated  by  the 
committee,  holds:  “That  a federal  form  of  govern- 
“ ment  offers  the  most  satisfactory  method  of  giving 
“local  self-government  in  a country  great  in  terri- 
“ tory  or  complex  in  population.”  ^Let  us  remember 
that  the  American  federal  state,  to  some  extent  at 
least,  is  made  possible  by  the  underlying  uniformity 
of  Anglo-Saxon  traditions  and  culture,  and  by  uni- 
formity of  language,  the  English  language.  Whether 
we  like  this  or  not,  we  must  accept  the  fadt  that  the 
profoundest  influences  in  American  life  are  Anglo- 
Saxon  traditions  and  Anglo-Saxon  culture.  As  a na- 
tion we  are  different  from  the  English,  of  course, 
but  only  different.  The  mainsprings  of  our  national 
thought  fundamentally  are  quite  similar.  Even  those 
of  us  who  are  not  of  Anglo-Saxon  descent  uncon- 
sciously use  Anglo-Saxon  methods  of  thought  and 
build  upon  Anglo-Saxon  traditions.  s^This  uniform- 


ity  of  outlook  and  uniformity  of  language  outweigh 
many  centrifugal  tendencies,  caused,  for  instance,  by 
divergent  economic  interests;  tendencies  which  other- 
wise might  seriously  endanger  the  stability  of  the 
American  state  — using  the  term  state  in  its  broad- 
est sense,  and  not  speaking  of  our  American  political 
subdivisions.  ^ In  various  press  comments  upon  the 
death  of  Emperor  Francis  Joseph  one  could  even  no- 
tice statements  referring  to  Austrian  hyphenism,  as 
if  American  hyphenism  and  the  aspirations  of  the 
various  Austrian  nationalities  could  be  compared!  It 
must  never  be  forgotten  that,  for  instance,  the  Czechs 
in  Europe  live  within  their  own  historic  boundaries, 
within  their  own  old  home,  where  once  they  were 
masters  of  their  own  destiny,  and  where  they  enjoyed 
rights  ofwhich  they  were  deprived,  and  still  are  being 
deprived,  by  force.  ^The  difference  between  Euro- 
pean nations  and  the  United  States  was  strikingly  set 
forth  some  years  ago  by  Mr.  Joaquim  Nabuco,  late 
Brazilian  Ambassador  to  this  country,  in  the  follow- 
ing words:  “You  are  a nation  in  some  respedts  of 
“ a unique  type.  . . . Every  other  nation  is,  or  was, 
“ composed  ofarace  or  ofseparate  races, speaking  each 
“ its  own  language;  you  are  a nation  formed  by  the 
“ fusion  of  races  of  different  languages,  brought,  by 
“ superior  inducements,  to  speak  only  the  hereditary 
“ language  of  the  country.  In  other  words,  you  are 
“ a nation  formed  of  nations  by  their  own  will.  Here 
“ lies  all  the  difference  : you  are  formed  by  free  im- 
“ migration,  not  by  conquest.  . . . This  is  the  first  and 
“ greatest  influence  I would  point  out  of  the  discov- 
“ ery  of  America  on  civilization:  the  appearance  on 


i7 


“ earth  of  an  immense  continent  destined  to  be  the 
“ new  home  of  the  old  European  races,  where  they 
“ would  meet  and  mix  and  speak  the  same  language, 
“ while  in  the  native  soil  their  old  stocks  would  con- 
“ tinue  separated  and  up  till  now  belligerent.  In  other 
“ words,  a fadt  never  seen  or  imagined  before,  of 
“ a mankind,  a new  mankind,  formed  by  self-selec- 
“ tion.”  s£The  ultimate  test  of  the  right  of  any  state 
and  any  government  to  exist  is  tobe  found  in  the  treat- 
ment it  accords  its  various  citizens.  Unless  it  treats  its 
citizens,  or,  as  the  European  term  runs,  its  subjects, 
equally,  it  loses  the  right  to  loyal  support  on  the  part 
of  these  subjects  or  citizens.  If  this  test  is  applied  to 
Austria,  Austria  appears  to  be  the  most  dismal  failure 
in  modern  history. 


1 8 


the  Germans,  has  become  an  essential  feature  of  the 
German  scheme  of  world  dominion.  One  of  the 
troubles  with  the  German  schemes  of  development 
has  been  that  the  Germans  have  always  held  Ger- 
manization  of  other  nationalities  a prime  requisite 
of  their  plans.  This  constitutes  an  important  differ- 
ence between  what  may  be  termed  English  and 
French  imperialism  and  German  schemes  of  expan- 
sion. ^The  German  “Drang  nach  Osten”  cannot  be 
realized  without  Austria  tied  hand  and  foot  to  Ber- 


19 


lin,  and  without  keeping  in  bondage  the  Slav  nation- 
alities in  Central  and  Southeastern  Europe.  When 
German  dreams  of  world  dominion  were  endangered 
by  the  victories  of  the  Balkan  League  in  1913,  the 
German  attitude  found  striking  expression  in  a 
speech  of  the  Chancellor,  delivered  April  7,  1913, 
in  the  German  Reichstag  in  support  of  increased 
military  appropriations ; from  it  the  following  de- 
serves to  be  quoted  verbatim:  “For  the  future  it  is 
“decisive  that  instead  of  European  Turkey,  whose 
“ life  as  a state  has  become  passive,  have  appeared 
“ states  that  show  a remarkable  strength  of  life.  We 
“ all  have  an  interest  in  seeing  this  power  prove  itself 
“ of  the  best  in  peace  as  it  has  in  war,  and  to  see  the 
“ Balkan  states  grow  in  close  economic  and  cultural 
“ contact  with  their  neighbors  and  with  the  group 
“ of  Western  powers.  Thus  they  shall  also  be  fadtors 
“ making  for  progress  and  European  peace.  But  in 
“ spite  of  this , one  thing  is  certain:  If  it  should  ever  come 
“ to  an  European  war  wherein  Slavs  and  Germans  shall 
“ stand  against  each  other , then  it  would  mean  damage 
“ to  the  Germans  if  in  the  present  system  of  equilibrium 
“ southern  Slav  states  were  to  take  the  place  hitherto  oc- 
“ cupied  by  European  Turkey.”  jit  These  are  thoughts 
couched  of  course  in  diplomatic  language,  but  it  is 
obvious  that  even  then  the  German  Chancellor  had 
in  mind  the  bugaboo  of  a racial  conflidt  between 
Slavs  and  Germans;  not  because  Germany  had  suf- 
fered any  real  damage,  but  because  Southern  Slavs 
had  thrown  off  the  yoke  of  Turkey  and  had  asserted 
their  right  to  growth  as  independent  nations.  ^Such 
was  the  political  philosophy  which  dominated  Ber- 


20 


21 


lin  in  1913;  it  also  dominated  the  most  influential 
circles  in  Vienna.  Of  a piece  with  the  speech  of 
the  German  Chancellor  is  a Vienna  letter  published 
in  the  Frankfurter  Zeitung , on  the  1 3th  of  May  of  the 
same  year.  The  letter  is  entitled  Oesterreichische  Ka- 
tastrophenpolitik;  the  writer  thereof  speaks  of  the  faCt 
that  owing  to  Serbian  growth  Austria  had  been  twice 
compelled  to  increase  its  military  expenses.  He  in- 
dicates that  the  real  instigator  of  all  these  alleged 
troubles  is  Russia,  and  that  there  is  just  one  way  of 
stopping  all  this:  “To  destroy  the  tools  of  pan-Slav- 
“ism;  to  subjugate  the  small  neighbors,  to  destroy 
“ the  Russian  Empire,  and  to  form  a number  of  buf- 
“ fer  states  under  Austrian  and  German  protectorate 
“ between  the  remnants  of  the  Russian  Empire  and 
“ CentralEurope.”  The  writer  is  refreshingly  frank 
in  saying  that  the  internal  conditions  of  Austria  re- 
quire the  same  measures;  that  it  has  been  impossible 
to  solve  the  Bohemian  question,  the  Polish-Ruthe- 
nian  question,  and  other  similar  problems;  that  these 
matters  endanger  Austria  in  its  existence,  and  that 
even  if  all  this  leads  to  an  European  war,  the  Central 
Powers  have  nothing  to  fear,  because  as  yet  they  are 
stronger  than  Russia  and  her  friends.  The  writer 
declares  that  this  is  not  only  his  opinion,  but  the 
opinion  of  responsible  Austrian  persons  of  impor- 
tance. We  can  readily  see  the  connection  between 
this  letter  and  the  speech  of  the  German  Chancellor 
hereinbefore  referred  to.  The  aim  thus  expressed  was 
simply  this:  The  crushing  of  the  Slav  nationalities  in 
Austria,  the  subjugation  of  Southern  Slavs,  and  the 
destruction  of  Russia.  ^The  writer  even  goes  so  far 


11 


Dr.  Charles  Kramarzh,  Leader  of  the  Bohemian 
(Czech)  delegation  to  the  Parliament  at  Vienna.  Is 
now  in  prison,  after  his  sentence  of  death  had  been 
commuted  to  a term  of  fifteen  years  at  hard  labor 


23 


as  to  say  that  in  any  event  Austria  has  nothing  to  lose, 
because  with  the  growth  of  Slav  nationalities  in  Aus- 
tria she  is  doomed  to  destruction  any  way,  and  that 
in  a world  war  she  may  have  a chance  to  save  herself. 
He  says  almost  literally  that  a sudden  catastrophe 
is  preferable  to  terror  without  end.  ^In  reading  and 
thinking  of  these  astonishing  documents,  we  must 
of  course  realize  that  when  these  writers  and  speak- 
ers deal  with  the  question  of  the  destruction  of  Aus- 
tria, they  fear  the  destruction  of  German  privileges 
and  German  domination  in  Austria;  for  it  is  well 
known  that  the  utmost  the  Slavs  within  Austria  ever 
demanded  were  equal  rights,  and  that  the  Germans 
were  unwilling  to  concede  this  moderate  demand. 
The  Bohemian  white  sheet  of  paper  had  become  pro- 
verbial in  Austrian  politics,  and  Bohemian  leading 
statesmen  told  the  Germans  time  and  again  to  place 
on  that  sheet  of  paper  all  their  demands  as  to  the 
rights  Germans  should  enjoy  in  Austria,  and  that  Bo- 
hemians will  have  no  objections  to  these,  provided 
that  the  Bohemians  have  and  enjoy  the  same  rights 
in  their  own  native  land.  Only  the  other  day,  in 
discussing  the  entry  of  Roumania  into  the  war,  the 
Pesti  Hirlap , an  influential  Budapest  paper,  declared 
that  Austria-Hungary  must  decide  between  Slavism 
and  Germanism  — this  in  an  empire,  the  majority  of 
which  is  Slav.  ^ I firmly  believe  that  this  war  will 
end  with  victory  for  the  Allies.  A temporary  truce, 
called  a peace,  may  be  patched  up,  but  if  so,  we  shall 
simply  be  confronted  with  a series  of  spasmodic  strug- 
gles, resembling  the  Napoleonic  wars  of  more  than 
a century  ago,  and  the  ultimate  outcome  will  be  that 


24 


German  dreams  of  world  dominion  will  be  doomed. 

A year  from  now,  two  years  from  now,  five,  ten,  or 
twenty  years  from  now,  in  any  event  at  some  future 
time,  those  parts  of  Austria  inhabited  by  Italians  will 
be  joined  to  Italy;  those  parts  inhabited  by  Rouma- 
nians to  Roumania ; those  by  Serbians  to  the  new  Ser- 
bia; and  Galicia  undoubtedly  will  constitute  a part 
of  the  future  autonomous  Poland.  ^ When  this  logi- 
cal historical  process  is  carried  out,  even  if  a rem- 
nant of  Austria  should  be  preserved,  the  only  nations 
left  within  the  new  Austria  will  be  the  Germans, 
the  Magyars,  the  Bohemians,  and  the  Slovaks.  ^ It 
will  be  seen  from  a mere  statement  of  this  fadt  that 
such  Austria  would  be  in  the  future,  as  it  has  been 
in  the  past,  a menace  to  European  peace.  s£In  such  a 
state  the  Czechs  and  Slovaks  would  constitute  the  mi- 
nority. The  internal  conditions  of  such  a state  would 
be  volcanic.  ^Austria  so  mutilated  would  mean  the 
perpetuation  of  oppression  of  Czechs  and  Slovaks  by 
the  German  and  Magyar  element,  and  since  oppres- 
sion inevitably  breeds  resistance,  here  again  would 
be  a foundation  for  future  upheavals.  ^ A mere  state- 
ment of  this  condition,  once  made,  seems  to  show 
conclusively  that  the  only  possible  solution  of  the 
Austrian  problem  is  to  get  rid  of  the  Austrian  Em- 
pire once  and  forever,  and  not  to  permit  the  repeti- 
tion of  experiences  the  world  had  to  undergo  while 
Turkey  was  permitted  to  pose  as  an  European  power. 
3^  After  all,  the  Austrian  question  is  the  Turkish 
problem  in  another  form.  Austria  can  be  no  more 
federalized  than  European  Turkey.  To  permit  Aus- 
tria to  exist  in  any  form  when  this  war  is  concluded 


25 


is  merely  to  delay  the  solution  of  a problem  that  will 
never  down.  And  in  the  life  of  nations,  as  well  as  of 
individuals,  delay  and  procrastination,  the  tendency 
to  postpone  a final  decision,  is  a crime  for  which  pen- 
alties are  sure  to  follow.  ^Austria  has  lost  its  right 
to  exist.  Even  now  it  has  few  of  the  attributes  of  a 
really  sovereign  state.  It  is  a mere  vassal  of  Germany. 
There  is  no  reason  for  maintaining  the  ghost  of  life 
in  a corpse  from  which  the  spirit  has  flown  never 
to  return.  ^So  much  for  what  might  be  called  the 
negative  side  of  the  Czech  problem.  What  about  the 
positive,  the  affirmative  phase?  Can  a self-sustaining 
Bohemian-Slovak  State  be  reconstructed?  Are  there 
present  the  necessary  state-forming  elements? 


26 


IV 


f a nation  is  conscious  of 
its  nationality,  if  it  demands  independence  and  lib- 
erty, if  it  has  proved  the  possibility  of  such  independ- 
ence by  its  economic  and  cultural  development,  its 
right  to  independence  is  removed  from  the  sphere 
of  debatable  questions.  s^The  Czechs  are  intensely 
conscious  of  their  nationality.  Bohemia,  once  one  of 
the  most  powerful  of  European  states,  lost  its  inde- 
pendence only  as  a result  of  the  application  of  brute 
force.  The  Czech  people  never  voluntarily  surren- 
dered their  right  to  independence,  and  against  the 


27 


rights  of  nations  there  is  no  statute  of  limitations. 
^When  the  war  broke  out,  of  all  the  belligerent 
countries  only  Austria  failed  to  convoke  its  parlia- 
ment, such  as  it  is.  When  this  failure  to  maintain 
even  the  semblance  of  parliamentary  life  began  to  be 
the  subject  of  international  comment,  the  Austrian 
government  commenced  negotiations  with  various 
political  parties.  It  was  especially  afraid  of  the  Czech 
protest.  It  asked  for  a pro-Austrian  declaration.  But 
cajolery,  promises,  threats,  nothing  could  induce  the 
Czechs  to  declare  even  in  mild  terms  for  Austria. 
The  Czech  political  parties  could  not  be  forced  to 
condemn  the  anti-Austrian  activities  of  those  Czech 
leaders  who  were  fortunate  enough  to  escape  from 
Austria  and  are  actively  engaged  in  the  movement 
for  Bohemian  independence.  Even  promises  of  clem- 
ency for  Czech  political  leaders  sentenced  to  death 
for  alleged  treason  to  the  Austrian  state  were  of  no 
avail.  Only  recently  the  cable  brought  a report  that 
an  offer  of  such  an  infamous  bargain  was  rejected  by 
the  Czechs.  s^The  civilized  world  is  well  aware  of 
the  fadt  that  in  spite  of  the  fierce  opposition  of  the 
Austrian  government  and  Austrian  Germans  to  the 
development  of  the  Czech  people,  this  nationality  has 
reached  a plane  surpassing  that  of  any  other  nation 
in  Austria,  and  that  in  literature  and  art  it  is  sec- 
ond to  no  nation  of  its  numerical  strength.  A nation 
that  gave  to  the  world  men  like  Hus  and  Komensky, 
a nation  that  in  modern  times  has  produced  a host 
of  writers  of  the  highest  rank,  many  philosophers, 
statesmen,  and  gifted  journalists,  such  a nation  is  cer- 
tainly capable  of  governing  itself.  Economically  and 


28 


financially  the  Czech  countries  are  the  richest  of  the 
present  Austrian  “provinces,”  and  when  freed  from 
oppressive  taxation,  discriminating  in  favor  of  finan- 
cially “passive”  Austrian  lands,  the  independent  Bo- 
hemian-Slovak  State  will  be  even  richer.  At  the 
present  time  62.7  per  cent  of  the  burden  of  Austrian 
taxation  is  borne  by  the  Czech  countries,  while  the 
rest  of  Austria  carries  only  37.3  per  cent.  The  Bohe- 
mian lands  surpass  the  other  Austrian  lands  in  the 
produdfion  of  grain ; 38  per  cent  of  the  grain  lands  of 
Austria  is  found  in  Bohemia.  ^Of  the  coal  found  in 
Austria,  8 3 per  cent  is  mined  in  the  Bohemian  lands ; 
60  per  cent  of  the  Austrian  iron  is  found  there;  90 
per  cent,  if  not  more,  of  the  sugar  fadtories  of  Aus- 
tria are  located  in  the  lands  of  the  Bohemian  crown; 
the  textile  industry  is  one  of  large  proportions,  and 
leather,  paper,  furniture,  and  eledfro-technical  indus- 
tries are  of  importance.  ^When  we  take  into  con- 
sideration the  undeveloped  resources  of  Slovakia, 
which  naturally  will  form  a part  of  the  state,  we  see 
very  readily  that  economically  the  future  Bohemian- 
Slovak  State  will  be  amply  able  to  stand  on  its  own 
feet.  At  this  point  we  may  emphasize  again  dis- 
tindfly  the  fadt  that  joining  the  Bohemians  in  their 
future  state  should  be  the  Slovaks  of  Hungary.  ^The 
world  has  by  this  time  realized  that  in  provoking  the 
Great  War  the  Magyar  oligarchy  was particeps  crimi- 
nis ; this  war  was  not  only  a German  war,  but  it  was 
a Magyar  war  as  well.  ^The  non-Magyar  national- 
ities in  Hungary  in  the  past  have  been  oppressed  in 
true  Asiatic  style,  and  the  Magyars  participated  in 
the  intrigues  leading  to  the  war,  because  they  hoped 


29 


that  as  a result  of  the  expected  German  and  Aus- 
trian vidtory  their  domination  in  Hungary  would 
be  perpetuated  and  their  dominion  extended.  Buda- 
pest has  been  the  most  faithful  ally  of  Berlin.  ^The 
Slovaks  form  a part  of  the  same  ethnic  group  as  the 
Bohemians ; they  desire  to  be  joined  with  the  Bohe- 
mians in  one  state,  and  this  wish  should  be  gratified 
not  only  because  it  manifests  a natural  tendency,  but 
also  because  it  is  in  the  interests  of  Europe  to  gratify 
it.  ^As  a matter  of  fadt  an  independent  Bohemian- 
Slovak  State  will  have  a population  of  over  twelve 
million  inhabitants,  and  in  territorial  extent  will  be 
eighth  among  twenty-two  European  sovereignties, 
and  it  cannot  be  said  that  such  a state  would  be  small. 
^ Moreover,  is  not  the  belief  in  the  necessity  of  large 
states  one  of  the  theories  which  are  destined  to  be 
abandoned?  Already  voices  have  arisen  that  certain 
states  have  become  too  large  to  manage  (Lord  Bryce, 
Mr.  L.  P.  Jacks,  editor  of  the  Hibbert  'Journal').  Mr. 
Louis  D.  Brandeis,  now  of  the  United  States  Supreme 
Court,  has  shown  that  even  under  modern  condi- 
tions certain  business  units  can  become  so  large  as  to 
be  physically  incapable  of  successful  administration. 
May  this  not  be  equally  true  of  states,  especially 
polyethnic  states  ? ^But  it  may  be  said  that  it  is  hard 
to  reconstruct  a state,  it  is  not  easy  to  organize  a new 
state.  Yes,  there  is  no  easy  road  to  anything  worth 
while.  The  road  of  progress  has  never  been  free  of 
thorns.  It  was  not  easy  to  organize  the  United  States 
of  America,  and  the  period  of  experimentation  under 
the  Articles  of  Confederation  was  full  of  trials  and 
tribulations.  For  alongtime  it wasaquestion  whether 


3° 


in  America  we  should  have  an  aggregation  of  loose- 
jointed  states,  or  whether  a foundation  for  a real  na- 
tion would  be  laid.  Yet  the  difficulties  did  not  pre- 
vent the  fathers  from  undertaking  the  task.  ^That 
the  new  state  would  not  have  direCt  access  to  the 
sea  seems  to  some  to  be  a serious  obstacle.  ^Access 
to  the  sea  is  important,  but  with  modern  methods  of 
communication  not  as  important  as  it  was  in  the  past. 
After  all,  the  sea  affords  simply  a means  of  communi- 
cation. Whether  we  are  restricted  to  communication 
by  the  sea,  or  by  rail,  makes  little  difference  if  a coun- 
try is  confronted  by  high  tariffs.  ^However,  an  in- 
dependent Bohemian-Slovak  State  can  be  connected 
with  the  future  Serbo-Croatia  by  giving  the  strip  of 
land  at  the  Hungarian  frontier  in  the  west,  either  to 
Serbia,  or  one  half  of  it  (north)  to  Bohemia,  the  other 
(south)  to  Serbia.  This  corridor  will  be  formed  of 
parts  of  the  counties  of  Pozsony  (Pressburg),  Sopron 
(Oedenburg),  Moson  (Wieselburg),  and  Vas  (Eisen- 
burg).  Such  a corridor  would  give  Bohemia  access 
to  the  Serbo-Croatian  ports.  Economic  rights  of  way 
for  land-locked  states  are  advocated  by  Mr.  Toynbee 
in  his  new  work  (The  New  Europe),  and  Mr.  Toyn- 
bee thus  indicates  how  the  problem  of  access  to  the 
sea  may  be  solved.  s£It  is  also  true  that  the  future 
Bohemian-Slovak  State  will  have  a German  and  per- 
haps a small  Magyar  minority,  but  in  central  and 
eastern  Europe  hardly  any  state  can  be  constructed 
without  certain  national  minorities.  In  the  present 
instance  these  minorities  are  not  as  large  as  the  false 
Austrian  and  Magyar  statistics  and  the  unequal  and 
unfair  suffrage  rules  would  make  it  appear.  ^It  ought 


3 1 


BOHEMIA 


GERMANY 


Breslau  ov. 


£.  5iuk-l  f>K 

w'iihk'"""11"''  ) ^ 

l Ustl  n.  L / Liberec  ^ 

rl^Pli"*  f C.  Llpa  Turno7^Zacle'f*y',^\ 

I'^Lrtv  M°st  ULitomJPicc  St.  Paka|Tru£ov_ 

Kraslice ' J A ^"“>0*8*^  - . 

0hr'  i£rlovy-Vary  PRAGUfiWk J!UT  Hradec  ^ $1^*1 

%-Cheb  Rakovnlk*  P,ra*la  fjZii!kov  7 Lafe  P.afdubice  "‘',y/5'  \,t  - 

Vs  ‘Mar.  Lazn£  _ Smichovy'vjnohrady  KfelTT^  Chradim  Clhoccft  Czjbf*h  Si 

E 


. M a I * A * ^ v-J  *)  (;Sov_ 

/Bystfice  RataJe  Chotfbof Iaw,*- 

Vot,ce  Nem.  BrodS.  \ J.)  MoheTnice 
*T3bor 


Nem.  Brod  ^ 

A !\iu*  VBoskovice  . 

c.xl  Tcrifkov**  A Kostelec. 

Sob&lav  jeniKov,  MeziFSe[  Prostfjov  - 

Pelhrimov,./  A J 

> Jindf.  Hradec^  M R A V I A - 


*Ja'rom5rice 

BudfcjoviceC  Vranovice 

/ ^ Znoi 


Slavkov 


^Znoimo 

- ,.*LI 


, Mikulov  /- 

“=Hru?ovany  .BfccTay^ 


Outline  Map  of  the  future  Bohemian-Slovak 


32 


State  : Bohemia,  Moravia,  Silesia,  and  Slovakia 


33 


to  be  fairly  easy  to  safeguard  the  interests  of  a Ger- 
man and  Magyar  minority  in  a Bohemian-Slovak 
State,  certainly  easier  than  it  would  be  to  protedt  the 
rights  of  Bohemians  and  Slovaks  in  a deformed  Aus- 
tria. It  is  rather  amusing  to  see  the  concern  some 
people  exhibit  over  the  possible  oppression  of  a small 
German  and  Magyar  minority  by  the  Czechs  and 
Slovaks,  although  they  never  appeared  to  be  very 
much  exercised  over  the  oppression  of  the  majority 
of  Czechs  and  Slovaks  by  a small  minority  of  Ger- 
mans and  Magyars.  But  in  any  event,  the  rights  of 
such  minorities  certainly  should  be  regulated  in  some 
tashion,  and  there  can  be  no  objection  to  this.  The 
federalization  of  Austria  and  the  safeguarding  of  the 
rights  of  Slavs  in  Austria  can  be  achieved  only  at 
the  point  of  Allied  guns.  This  is  no  easier  and  per- 
haps decidedly  more  difficult  than  to  dissolve  Aus- 
tria and  get  rid  of  the  problem  forever.  ^Basing  the 
statement  on  historical  records,  it  is  not  to  be  ex- 
pected that  the  Bohemians  will  oppress  the  Germans. 
In  spheres  where  the  Czechs  had  any  degree  of  self- 
government,  as  for  instance  in  school  matters,  the 
Germans  were  never  denied  their  legitimate  needs. 
The  municipality  of  Prague  has  always  furnished  ad- 
equate school  facilities  for  the  small  German  minor- 
ity in  Prague,  and  this  is  decidedly  more  than  was 
done  by  municipalities  in  the  hands  of  Germans  for 
their  Bohemian  minorities.  ^The  thought  cannot 
be  elaborated  in  this  paper,  but  it  is  worth  noting 
that  a policy  of  denationalization  of  other  peoples  is 
one  peculiar  almost  wholly  to  the  Germans.  After  all, 
there  is  such  a thing  as  psychology  of  nations,  and 


34 


the  Slavs  have  never  been  noted  for  attempts  to  im- 
pose their  language  upon  other  nationalities.  Russia 
is  not  an  exception  to  the  rule.  If  we  stop  to  think 
about  it,  it  is  immediately  recognized  that  the  reac- 
tionary policies  of  Russia  have  been  due  largely  to 
the  Junkers  from  Russian  Baltic  Provinces  who  are 
of  German  descent.  ^The  faCtors  thus  enumerated, 
the  right  of  any  nation  to  independence  once  its  pos- 
sibility is  demonstrated,  the  necessity  of  dissolving 
Austria  in  the  interests  of  permanent  peace,  I believe 
to  be  decisive  of  the  merits  of  the  Czech  case.  ^ I 
would  not  even  fear  the  joining  of  purely  German 
parts  of  Austria  to  the  German  Empire.  This  would 
carry  the  principle  of  nationality  to  its  logical  con- 
clusion. It  would  perhaps  strengthen  Germany  ab- 
solutely, but  very  seriously  weaken  it  relatively.  To 
the  German  Empire  would  be  added  a few  million 
Germans,  but  it  would  be  deprived  of  the  support  of 
a much  larger  number  of  Slavs,  who  are  being  made 
use  of  to  fight  the  battles  of  their  bitterest  enemy, 
and  one  bent  upon  their  subjugation,  even  upon  their 
destruction.  s^The  Bohemian  question  is  simplicity 
itself  when  we  consider  the  problem  of  small  nation- 
alities in  Europe  generally,  and  when  we  realize  that 
to  regenerate  Europe  means  also  the  reconstruction  of 
Poland,  Serbo-Croatia,  and  the  freeing  of  the  French 
and  Danes  in  Germany.  Yet,  whether  difficult  or 
easy,  these  questions  must  be  faced  unflinchingly. 
sHAgain,  let  it  not  be  forgotten  that  the  Czech  ques- 
tion is  one  of  restoration;  that  the  Czechs  are  asking 
for  something  which  de  jure  they  never  surrendered. 
The  Hapsburgs  were  called  to  the  Bohemian  throne 


35 


by  the  free  will  of  the  representatives  of  the  Bohe- 
mian State,  and  they  undertook  by  solemn  oaths  and 
pledges  to  protect  and  safeguard  the  independence 
of  this  state.  The  violation  of  such  pledges  on  their 
part,  and  the  deprivation  of  the  Czechs  of  their  in- 
dependence by  force,  does  not  do  away  with  their 
legal  rights,  so  that  the  Czech  claim  has  the  strongest 
possible  legal  sandtion.  s^The  fadt  that  the  Czechs 
at  one  time  had  a strong  and  powerful  state,  well  or- 
ganized, as  states  were  organized  then,  is  also  a suf- 
ficient proof  of  inherent  political  capacity.  s£The 
Bohemian  question  has  become  an  international 
problem  par  excellence.  It  was  Bismarck  who  main- 
tained that  the  power  that  rules  Bohemia  rules  Eu- 
rope. Such  a problem  cannot  be  permitted  to  remain 
unsolved.  The  only  possible  solution  which  will  guar- 
antee permanent  peace,  and  which  will  also  be  fair 
to  the  nationalities  concerned,  is  the  reconstruc- 
tion of  a Bohemian-Slovak  State.  Vidtor  Hugo  had 
the  theft  of  Alsace-Lorraine  in  mind  when  he  said: 
“Another  war,  alas  ! Yes,  it  is  necessary.”  The  Czechs 
firmly  believe  that  at  the  conclusion  of  this  war  the 
Bohemian  question  will  be  solved,  and  that  they  will 
regain  their  independence ; but  if  the  problem  is 
not  definitely  disposed  of,  and  disposed  of  right,  we 
shall  have  to  paraphrase  Vidtor  Hugo’s  exclamation: 
“Another  war,  alas!  Yes,  it  is  unavoidable.” 


36 


believe  it  was  Walter 
Lippman  who  said  that  the  highest  ideal  and  aim 
of  statesmanship  is  to  satisfy  human  needs.  This  is 
to  be  understood  in  the  broadest  possible  sense.  The 
highest  ideal  of  statesmanship  in  its  international 
sense  can  only  be  the  satisfaction  of  legitimate  na- 
tional needs.  Just  as  long  as  such  legitimate  national 
needs  are  not  satisfied,  the  situation  in  Europe  will 
be  full  of  explosives,  and  just  so  long  the  peace  of  the 
world  will  be  menaced.  ^Especially  we  in  America 
should  bear  in  mind  that  the  problem  of  small  nation- 


37 


alities  is  also  one  of  extension  of  democracy.  Demo- 
cracy in  a nation  will  never  be  realized  until  all  indi- 
viduals within  the  nation  are  afforded  an  equality 
of  opportunity  ; democracy  among  nations  will  never 
be  realized  until  all  nations,  be  theylarge  or  small,  are 
afforded  an  equal  opportunity  to  develop  and  grow 
legitimately.  ^The  mere  existence  of  Austria  has 
become  a denial  of  the  right  of  numerous  nations 
not  only  to  develop,  but  to  exist.  These  nations  will 
not  submit  to  the  lot  of  slaves,  and  their  resistance 
will  be  a constant  danger  signal  to  everybody  that 
all  is  not  well  with  the  world,  that  a new  catastro- 
phe may  result  any  moment  because  of  their  resist- 
ance to  oppression  ; and  this  necessarily  would  again 
involve  the  whole  world.  ^So  we  must  come  to  the 
conclusion  that  even  America  is  vitally  interested  in 
the  Austrian,  and,  more  specifically,  the  Bohemian 
problem.^ Is  it  too  much  to  hope  that  American 
statesmanship  will  rise  high  enough  to  demand  a solu- 
tion of  such  questions,  now  agitating  the  world,  and 
that  it  will  insist  upon  such  definite  solution  at  the 
future  peace  conference  ? A school  of  thought  has 
arisen  in  this  country,  small  as  yet  to  be  sure,  which 
seems  to  think  that  the  only  practical  statesman- 
ship is  to  have  in  mind  national  interests  in  the  nar- 
rowest sense  of  the  term.  Those  entertaining  such  a 
narrow  viewpoint  should  be  reminded  of  a passage 
in  Washington’s  Farewell  Address,  a passage  seldom, 
if  ever,  thought  of:  “ It  will  be  worthy  of  a free,  en- 
“ lightened,  and,  at  no  distant  period,  a great  nation, 
“ to  give  to  mankind  the  magnanimous  and  too  novel 
“ example  of  a people  always  guided  by  an  exalted 


38 


“justice  and  benevolence.  Who  can  doubt  that,  in 
“ the  course  of  times  and  things,  the  fruits  of  such  a 
“ plan  would  richly  repay  any  temporary  advantages 
“ which  might  be  lost  by  a steady  adherence  to  it? 
“ Can  it  be  that  Providence  has  not  connected  the 
“ permanent  felicity  of  a nation  with  its  virtue  ? The 
“ experiment,  at  least,  is  recommended  by  every  sen- 
“ timent  which  ennobles  human  nature.”  Let  us  real- 
ize that  so-called  impractical  statesmanship  is  some- 
times practical  in  the  highest  degree,  and  that  often 
what  is  considered  practical  statesmanship  in  the 
long  run  proves  itself  highly  impractical.  s^Mazzini 
once  declared  : “The  first  people  with  faith  and  en- 
“ ergy  to  cry  to  other  peoples  : ‘ I am  fighting  for  you 
“ all.  Follow  me/  this  people  will  give  its  name  to  an 
“ age.”  Shall  this  be  the  American  age? 

Charles  Pergler 


39 


This  volume,  with  drawings  by  Fred.  T.  Chapman 
and  J.  C.Vondrous, was  designed  by  Vojtech  Preissig, 
and  printed  at  The  Merrymount  Press,  Boston,  1917 


